The Vampires on
All hope appears lost -- with evil rampant in the Gothic-Punk world. The
control of the vampires is almost complete, with governments, churches,
charities -- all under their domination.
But even in such a despairing and apathetic world there must be light: light
enough to counter-balance the darkness. This light can be found in True
Among the most devoted to restoring humanity's control over their destiny
are the Church Knights. These mortal warriors of the Sword and the Word
are blessed with Holy powers to give them a chance to change the world.
- Jamie Seidel, Church Knights: The Cainite Crusade
Sightings from The Catbird Seat
~ o ~
THE SUNNY SPIN
About EMILY's List
EMILY's List is committed to electing more pro-choice Democratic women to office to
build a more progressive America. Women have incredible power to shape this critical
election -- and EMILY's List is capturing the power of women as candidates, as
contributors, as campaign professionals, and as voters to turn our nation around.
EMILY’s List is a political network that elects pro-choice Democratic women by raising
money for their campaigns, helping them build effective campaigns and mobilizing
Women We Helped Elect
EMILY's List wins elections. Since our founding, we have helped elect 79 pro-choice
Democratic women members of Congress, 15 senators, 9 governors, and hundreds of
women to state and local office.
Meet the Senior Leadership team of EMILY's List, one of the largest political action
committees in the nation.
~ ~ ~
THE DARK REALITY
EMILY's List--Don't Be Fooled
BY Karen Cross
EMILY's List. Sounds kind of nice, like, let's have a cup of tea. Don't be fooled.
EMILY's List is a political action committee which raises massive amounts of money for
female Democratic candidates who support abortion on demand, including partial-birth
abortion, and who want abortion subsidized with your tax dollars.
EMILY's List is currently the best-funded PAC in the country. It has already raised
nearly $20 million and spent $17.5 million, as of May 2006. Its candidates can also
expect to receive upwards of hundreds of thousands of dollars from other groups as a
result of an endorsement by EMILY's List.
On May 11, 2006, EMILY's List hosted a luncheon featuring its endorsed candidates for
the United States House and Senate. This year, EMILY's List boasts more candidates
than it has had in decades. At least a dozen will likely be involved in head-to-head
races with our pro-life candidates in the November 7 general elections.
While the mission of EMILY's List is to elect pro-abortion Democratic women to
Congress, it was clear during this recent luncheon that it is intentionally steering away
from the subject of abortion. If what it said last month holds true, it will attack pro-life
candidates less on the issue of abortion than on foreign policy or domestic policy
issues--or any other issue. It doesn't matter--as long as it is not the issue of abortion,
which is a loser for EMILY's List.
Even many pro-abortion candidates recognize that being pro-life gives a candidate a
clear advantage among voters who cast their vote based on a candidate's stand on
abortion. So they are reluctant to openly discuss the issue. They know that since 1980,
every pro-life presidential candidate has shown a significant net gain among voters who
place primary emphasis on abortion in deciding for whom they will vote.
Pro-lifers understand that pro-life legislation saves lives. In order to pass protective pro-life legislation, pro-life candidates must prevail in November.
According to its web site, EMILY's List "is ready to take back Congress in 2006" with its
pro-abortion candidates. If that happens, pro-life legislation would be blocked and pro-life judges would have little chance of being confirmed.
National Right to Life PAC will not allow pro-abortion candidates to hide behind other
issues. Together with pro-lifers across America, we will work tirelessly to expose the
true positions of candidates on life.
Fortunately, pro-life voters are passionate, dedicated people whose purpose is to end
the tragedy of abortion. To do so, we must make sure that pro-abortion candidates like
those endorsed by EMILY's List do not prevail this November.
On May 23, with the help of National Right to Life PAC and scores of pro-life volunteers
in Idaho's first congressional district, Bill Sali, a pro-life candidate, prevailed. He
defeated Sheila Sorenson, a pro-abortion Republican, who was the frontrunner in the
race just weeks out.
As they always do, grassroots pro-lifers realized what was at stake in this race. In a
year of formidable challenges for the cause of life, fortunately, our pro-life candidates
January 22, 2009
ROE v. WADE: 36 YEARS OF
DEATH AND DESTRUCTION
Pro-Lifers Prepare to Battle Pro-Abortion Agenda
WASHINGTON – From coast to coast, pro-lifers are marking the 36th anniversary of
the Supreme Court's Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton decisions, which legalized
abortion for any reason, even as a method of birth control.
Since 1973, these decisions have resulted in the death of more than 50 million
"We mourn the deaths of 50 million unborn babies that were the tragic
consequence of these decisions," said Wanda Franz, Ph.D., president of National
Right to Life. "Sadly, under the Obama Administration, we can expect a radical
agenda which would cause this number to increase dramatically."
In consultation with a coalition of pro-abortion groups, which submitted a 55-page
outline of pro-abortion policies to the Obama transition team, the Obama
Administration has an agenda designed to repeal many, if not all, of the pro-life policies
in place at the state and federal level.
Through their extreme agenda, the Administration wants to fund organizations that
perform and promote abortion; force employer health insurance plans to cover abortion;
force hospitals and health care professionals to provide abortions; and enact the so-called "Freedom of Choice Act" – a bill that would invalidate virtually all state and
federal laws restricting abortion, including parental notification laws, and which
would make partial-birth abortion legal again....
January 23, 2009
Obama reverses Bush abortion-funds policy
By MATTHEW LEE and LIZ SIDOTI, Associated Press Writers
WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama on Friday struck down the Bush
administration's ban on giving federal money to international groups that perform
abortions or provide abortion information — an inflammatory policy that has bounced in
and out of law for the past quarter-century.
Obama's move, the latest in an aggressive first week reversing contentious Bush
policies, was warmly welcomed by liberal groups and denounced by abortion rights
The ban has been a political football between Democratic and Republican
administrations since GOP President Ronald Reagan first adopted it 1984. Democrat
Bill Clinton ended the ban in 1993, but Republican George W. Bush re-instituted it in
2001 as one of his first acts in office.
"For too long, international family planning assistance has been used as a political
wedge issue, the subject of a back and forth debate that has served only to divide us,"
Obama said in a statement released by the White House. "I have no desire to continue
this stale and fruitless debate."
He said the ban was unnecessarily broad and undermined family planning in
"In the coming weeks, my administration will initiate a fresh conversation on family
planning, working to find areas of common ground to best meet the needs of women
and families at home and around the world," the president said.
Obama issued the presidential memorandum rescinding the Bush policy without
coverage by the media, late Friday afternoon. The abortion measure is a highly
emotional one for many people, and the quiet signing was in contrast to the televised
coverage of Obama's announcement Wednesday on ethics rules and Thursday's
signing of orders on closing the Guantanamo Bay prison camp and banning torture in
the questioning of terror suspects.
His action came one day after the 36th anniversary of the landmark Supreme Court
ruling in Roe v. Wade that legalized abortion.
The Bush policy had banned U.S. taxpayer money, usually in the form of Agency for
International Development funds, from going to international family planning groups
that either offer abortions or provide information, counseling or referrals about abortion
as a family planning method.
Critics have long held that the rule unfairly discriminates against the world's poor by
denying U.S. aid to groups that may be involved in abortion but also work on other
aspects of reproductive health care and HIV/AIDS, leading to the closure of free and
low-cost rural clinics.
Supporters of the ban say that the United States still provides millions of dollars in
family planning assistance around the world and that the rule prevents anti-abortion
taxpayers from backing something they believe is morally wrong.
The ban has been known as the "Mexico City policy" for the city a U.S. delegation first
announced it at a U.N. International Conference on Population.
Both Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, who will oversee
foreign aid, had promised to do away with the rule during the presidential campaign.
Clinton said Friday evening that for seven years Bush's policy made it more difficult for
women around the world to gain access to essential information and health care
"Rather than limiting women's ability to receive reproductive health services, we should
be supporting programs that help women and their partners make decisions to ensure
their health and the health of their families," Clinton said.
In a related move, Obama also said he would restore funding to the U.N. Population
Fund (UNFPA). Both he and Clinton had pledged to reverse a Bush administration
determination that assistance to the organization violated U.S. law known as the Kemp-Kasten amendment.
Obama, in his statement, said he looked forward to working with Congress to fulfill that
promise: "By resuming funding to UNFPA, the U.S. will be joining 180 other donor
nations working collaboratively to reduce poverty, improve the health of women and
children, prevent HIV/AIDS and provide family planning assistance to women in 154
Thoraya Ahmed Obaid, executive director of the U.N. Population Fund, said: "The
president's actions send a strong message about his leadership and his desire to
support causes that will promote peace and dignity, equality for women and girls and
economic development in the poorest regions of the world."
"We are confident that under the new president's direction, the U.S. will resume its
leadership in promoting and protecting women's reproductive health and rights
worldwide," Obaid said in a statement issued at U.N. headquarters in New York.
The Bush administration had barred U.S. money from the fund, contending that
its work in China supported a Chinese family planning policy of coercive abortion
and involuntary sterilization. UNFPA has vehemently denied that it does.
Congress had appropriated $40 million to the UNFPA in the past budget year, but the
administration had withheld the money as it had done every year since 2002.
Organizations and lawmakers that had pressed Obama to rescind the Mexico City
policy were jubilant.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said the move "will help save lives and
empower the poorest women and families to improve their quality of life and their
"Today's announcement is a very powerful signal to our neighbors around the world that
the United States is once again back in the business of good public policy and ideology
no longer blunts our ability to save lives around the globe," said Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
Population Action International, an advocacy group, said that the policy had
"severely impacted" women's health and that the step "will help reduce the number of
unintended pregnancies, abortions and women dying from high-risk pregnancies
because they don't have access to family planning."
Anti-abortion groups and lawmakers condemned Obama's decision.
"I have long supported the Mexico City Policy and believe this administration's
decision to be counter to our nation's interests," said Senate Republican leader
Mitch McConnell of Kentucky.
"Coming just one day after the 36th anniversary of the tragic Roe v. Wade decision, this
presidential directive forces taxpayers to subsidize abortions overseas — something
no American should be required by government to do," said House Minority Leader
John Boehner, R-Ohio.
Rep. Mike Pence, R-Ind., called it "morally wrong to take the taxpayer dollars of
millions of pro-life Americans to promote abortion around the world."
"President Obama not long ago told the American people that he would support policies
to reduce abortions, but today he is effectively guaranteeing more abortions by
funding groups that promote abortion as a method of population control," said
Douglas Johnson, legislative director of the National Right to Life Committee.
December 3, 2008
Undercover at Planned Parenthood
By Michelle Malkin
I’ve alerted you many times to the invaluable investigative work of Lila Rose.
She and her team are back with another inside look at the predators of Planned
Parenthood — subsidized with your tax dollars. At a clinic in Indiana, Rose’s team
catches the abortion provider’s staff deliberately violating the state’s mandatory
reporting laws for sexual abuse.
Watch: Indiana Planned Parenthood Covers Up Sexual Abuse of 13-year Old -
Press release from Live Action Films — a new media movement for life:
BLOOMINGTON, IN, December 3 –- New footage released today from an undercover
camera inside an abortion clinic in Bloomington shows Planned Parenthood staff
deliberately violating the state’s mandatory reporting laws for sexual abuse.
The footage shows Lila Rose, a UCLA student journalist and president of right-to-life
advocacy group Live Action, posing as a 13-year-old girl. In an appointment with a
Planned Parenthood nurse, Rose says she has been impregnated by a 31-year-old
man, a clear case of child molestation under Indiana state law.
On tape, the nurse acknowledges her responsibility to report the abuse, but assures
Rose she will not. The nurse says, “I am supposed to report to Child Protective
Services,” but tells Rose, “Okay, I didn’t hear the age [of the 31-year-old]. I don’t want to
know the age.”
She then instructs Rose how to obtain a secret abortion by crossing state lines in order
to avoid Indiana’s parental consent law. The nurse also coaches Rose to cover for the
31-year-old man by saying he is only 14. She says, “You’ve seen him around, you know
he’s 14, he’s in your grade and whatever. You know what I mean.”
Rose said she and other students in Live Action recorded the video over the summer in
a multi-state investigation of the abortion industry. Rose described the undercover
audit, called The Mona Lisa Project, as “demonstrating the routine lawlessness of
abortion providers at Planned Parenthood.” Rose noted, “Today’s video release is only
a sample from many hours of similarly disturbing footage.”
Planned Parenthood, a tax-exempt nonprofit, made over $100 million in profits last
year and has a billion-dollar budget, nearly a third of which comes from taxpayers
through government funding.
Jackie Stollar, student president of a Live Action chapter in Oregon, accompanied Rose
on the investigation. “In a repeated pattern, Planned Parenthood has violated the
public trust. It should have its government funding revoked,” she said. “During an
economic crisis, can the government really spare $300 million to support such an
“The Mona Lisa Project demonstrates how quickly the abortion industry’s
disrespect for unborn children becomes disregard for all humans,” Rose
explained. “Planned Parenthood offers no solutions for the victim of statutory
rape—they give her an abortion and a bag of condoms and send her straight back
into the arms of the abuser.”
The video is available online here, and can also be found with more information on The
Mona Lisa Project at LiveActionFilms.org.
For Immediate Release
Jan 20, 2007
For More Information
Statement by Ellen R. Malcolm, Endorsing
Sen. Hillary Clinton for President
The following is a statement from EMILY's List President Ellen R. Malcolm announcing
their endorsement of Senator Hillary Clinton for President of the United States.
"I am one of the millions of women who have waited all their lives to see the first woman
sworn in as president of the United States — and now we have our best opportunity to
see that dream fulfilled.
On the national stage and in the neighborhoods of New York, Sen. Hillary Clinton has
put her expertise and power behind solutions that make the lives of the American
people safer and more prosperous. No one is more qualified to bring to the White
House the kind of principled and effective leadership our nation so desperately needs.
It is with tremendous excitement and pride that EMILY's List endorses Sen.
Hillary Clinton for president.
As Sen. Clinton begins her historic journey, EMILY's List will be with her every step of
the way — raising early money from our grassroots donor network of tens of thousands
of EMILY's List members, using our vast political resources to help her build a strong
national campaign, and mobilizing millions of women voters through our
groundbreaking WOMEN VOTE! program to support her and every Democrat on the
ticket in 2008."
December 17, 2006
The Drudge Report has had headlines about this scandal several times lately:
Rich Israelis Seeking ‘Rejuvenation’
Linked To Horrifically Murdered
By: Sorcha Faal, What Does It Mean?
In a World gone completely insane, there are very few reports we research that truly
shock us on all levels as human beings, today one such report has shaken us all due to
its sheer horrific brutality, the murdering and butchery of new-born babies for their
stem cells and internal organs so that rich Westerners are able to have what are
called ‘Rejuvenation’ treatments.
From today’s FSB reports there is apparent confirmation supporting the allegations
made by one of Ukraine’s top prosecutors, Irina Bogomolova, who was dismissed
from her investigation involving the murdering of newborn babies for their stem cells
and organs, and as also confirmed by Western media sources, and as we can read as
reported by Britain’s Telegraph News Service in their article titled “Stem cell baby
deaths probe 'too close to the truth', claims investigator", and which says:
"A Ukrainian investigator looking into claims that new-born babies were killed to harvest
their stem cells and internal organs says she was removed from the case after
demanding that the inquiry be extended to all Ukraine's maternity hospitals. Irina
Bogomolova, who works in the chief prosecutor's office in the capital, Kiev, claims she
was taken off the case because she came too close to the truth while investigating
allegations made by women who claim their babies were taken away from them
immediately after birth.
She said: "I was sacked for political reasons. I demanded an investigation into all
maternity wings in hospitals across Ukraine and I was relieved of duty after making that
demand. "A trade in stem cells exists here... I suspect there is a lot of bribery going on,
right up to highest levels." Pregnant women, especially from rural areas, are very
vulnerable targets as they will obviously believe whatever the doctors tell them. It's easy
to take their babies from them and tell them they died or were born dead due to
The Council of Europe is to investigate allegations that newborn babies, and foetuses,
have been killed to provide stem cells and internal organs for controversial medical and
cosmetic treatments. Officials of the Strasbourg-based human rights organisation are to
travel to Ukraine in February to investigate the role played by some of the country's
research centres and maternity hospitals in the international trade."
Even more disturbing about these reports are the ‘links’ provided between numerous
Ukrainian Maternity Hospitals and Israel’s pharmaceutical giant Teva Pharmaceutical
Industries Ltd.*, who are alleged to be the purchasers of these murdered babies
stem cells, and organs, through its alliance with Jerusalem-based Gamida Cell.
The Gamida Cell Company’s research is described as:
"Gamida Cell is developing drugs based on stem-cell research. Stem cells are
primordial cells, early in development and non-differentiated. In response to
biochemical stimuli (that are not well understood), the stem cells differentiate into
specific ones, such as heart, nerve, muscle, epidermis and so on."
To the actual process of older humans being able to be rejuvenated by the stem cells of
babies we can read:
"According to modern science, there are no natural laws preventing successful
rejuvenation. Aging is an accumulation of damage to macromolecules, cells,
tissues and organs. If any of that damage can be repaired, the result is
There have been many experiments which have been shown to increase the maximum
life span of laboratory animals, thereby achieving life extension. A few experimental
methods such as replacing hormones to youthful levels have had considerable success
in partially rejuvenating laboratory animals and humans. There are at least eight
important hormones that decline with age: 1. human growth hormone (HGH); 2. the
sexual hormones: testosterone or estrogen/progesterone; 3. erithropoietin EPO; 4.
insulin; 5. DHEA; 6. melatonin; 7. thyroid; 8. pregnenolone. In theory, if all or some of
these hormones are replaced, the body will respond to them as it did when it was
younger, thus repairing and restoring many body functions. This seems to be borne out
in hundreds of thousands of persons who have replaced hormones for many years,
especially human growth hormone (HGH, a.k.a. GH).
Most attempts at genetic repair have traditionally involved the use of a retrovirus to
insert a new gene into a random position on a chromosome. But by attaching zinc
fingers (which determine where transcription factors bind) to endonucleases (which
break DNA strands) homologous recombination can be induced to correct and replace
defective (or undesired) DNA sequences. The first applications of this technology are to
isolate stem cells from the bone marrow of patients having blood disease mutations, to
correct those mutations in laboratory dishes using zinc finger endonucleases and to
transplant the stem cells back into the patients.
Regenerative medicine uses three different strategies:
Implantation of stem cells from culture into an existing tissue structure
Implantation of stem cells into a tissue scaffold that guides restoration or
Induction of residual cells of a tissue structure to regenerate the necessary body part."
To the moral implications of the World’s rich being able to extend their lives via the
murdering of new-born babies there are no historical counterparts, but does serve as
yet another horrific example of how degenerate of Mind and Soul the Western peoples
have truly become.
It should also be noted that these FSB reports linking the Israelis, and the Western
peoples, to these Ukrainian baby murders could also be a part of the ongoing, and
increasing, propaganda war currently underway between Russia and the Western
Powers over Russia’s refusal to accept new United Nations laws over the Serbian
breakaway region of Kosovo, and which the United States is preparing to us on its own
territory for the establishment of their North American Union comprising the Nations of
the United States, Mexico and Canada.
© December 17, 2006 EU and US all rights reserved.
(Thanks to V.K. Durham at The Antechamber for this article)
~ ~ ~
*And who owns Teva Pharmaceutical Industries ?
and...what is their connection with our Secretary of Defense,
March 23, 2003
PARENTS SEEK NEW INQUIRY INTO
HARVESTING OF INFANTS’ ORGANS
By Lizette Alvarez, New York Times
DUBLIN, Ireland - When Flonnuala O’Reilly’s baby boy, Michael, who was born with
severe birth defects, died at 5 months during exploratory surgery, she asked to be
allowed to dress him in his yellow baby outfit.
O’Reilly gave the infant a final hug, then buried him in a white coffin no bigger than a
Five years later, when news organizations reported that hospitals in Dublin had been
removing children’s organs during autopsies and storing them for research without the
parents’s knowledge, O’Reilly drummed up the courage to call Our Lady’s Hospital for
Sick Children in Crumlin, the country’s largest pediatric hospital. In a meeting with
hospital officials, she was told that her son’s heart and lungs had, in fact, been
“I was being told that my son’s organs are being kept in a bucket of formaldehyde down
there,” O’Reilly said.
“My child’s life relegated to a few spare body parts. My beautiful child.”
Since that meeting in 1999, O’Reilly, like hundreds of other parents in Ireland who
discovered that their children’s organs had been removed without their knowledge, has
sought answers to many questions.
Some were quickly answered: The hospital said it had not asked O’Reilly’s permission
to remove the organs because it did not want to further upset her after she had just lost
a child. Apologies were made, and the practice stopped. But questions about why the
organs were removed and whether anyone profited from the practice await the
completion of an independent government inquiry started in 2001.
Now, O’Reilly and other parents, distressed at the slow pace and ineffectiveness at the
slow pace and ineffectiveness of that investigation, are demanding a new one, which
they say must have subpoena power to compel the hospitals to explain their actions.
At least 50 families, facing a three-year statute of limitations, have also gone to court to
retain their right to sue.
Charlotte Yeates, 50, was the first mother to telephone a hospital and ask about her
daughter’s organs after she saw a documentary on television about a similar scandal in
Bristol, England. After she took her story to the media, others, like O’Reilly, also started
Yeates, O’Reilly and others formed an organization called Parents for Justice, which
now includes 800 families, and lobbied hard for information.
The parents found that the removal and use of organs for research dated at least to
1970, and was routine and legal, in about 200 hospitals and other health care facilities.
A few hospitals had for small amounts of money sent pituitary glands to
pharmaceutical companies that were researching dwarfism.
Some hospitals said that pathologists stored the organs in the hope of preventing
similar deaths. They said they did not think there was anything wrong with the practice.
It had never been questioned.
“The extent of the organ retention was a shock even to people in the profession,” said
Dr. Declan Keane, the head of the National Maternity Hospital in Dublin, which was
among the first to return stored organs to parents.
When the government opened its inquiry, it promised a report in six months. Hospital
cooperation was voluntary out of concerns about patient confidentiality. Once a report
was issued, the Irish Parliament would decide whether to do its own investigation.
But the investigation has lagged. Paul Cantwell, the assistant principal for the
Department of Health and Children, is expected to finish the section on pediatric
hospitals by the end of the year.
Soon after news broke, the government ordered hospitals to return stored organs and
change their policies, and they did. Families began arriving to pick up their children’s
organs or to learn that the organs had been burned.
Now families whose children must undergo a post-mortem examination are explicitly
asked their permission to remove and store organs for research.
From And the Truth Shall Set You Free, by David Icke:
Ask most people about the master race mentality and they will point to Adolf Hitler and
the Nazis. But again, it is not as simple as that.
The plan for a master race and the elimination of ‘lesser’ races did not begin and end in
Nazi Germany. It began long before and it is still going on....
This master race mentality is another part of the Elite’s plan for the New World Order. . .
. The Nazis were doing and saying publicly what the Elite in Britain and America had
been saying and funding long before the word Nazi was even heard of.
EUGENICS is, to quote the Oxford Concise Dictionary, “... the production of fine
offspring by the improvement of inherited qualities.”
The term eugenics was coined by the Englishman, Francis Galton, in the later years of
the 19th century. He called for society to intervene to maintain racial purity.
Galton wanted the forced sterilisation of the ‘unfit’.
Another ‘pioneer’ of this mindset was Thomas Robert Malthus, born in 1766. It was
from him that the theory of the ‘survival of the fittest’ was passed on through Herbert
Spencer to Charles Darwin.
Malthus was obsessed with the culling of the population and proposed a series of
measures against the ‘lower races’ (the poor), to keep the population down and , as he
saw it, to prevent the human genetic stream being dominated by such ‘inferior’ racial
In his best known work, Essay, he suggested that streets should be made narrower and
more people crowded into houses, to encourage the return of the plague. Villages
should be built next to stagnant pools and, above all, remedies for preventing and
curing disease ought to be strongly condemned, he said.
Malthus went on: “We are bound in justice and honour formally to disclaim the right of
the poor to support. To this end, I should propose a regulation be made declaring that
no child born ... should ever be entitled to parish assistance.... The [illegitimate] infant is
comparatively speaking, of little value to society, as others will immediately supply its
place.... All children beyond what would be required to keep up the population to this
[desired] level, must necessarily perish, unless room be made for them by the deaths of
From such a mind did the idea of the ‘survival of the fittest’ emerge, and it has
dominated ‘science’ ever since! Add to this the belief that the intellect of a person is
genetically determined by the intellect of the parents and you have the eugenics
movement, which came to the surface so infamously under the rule of Adolf Hitler....
Names ... such as the Harrimans and the Rockefellers, were seriously into eugenics.
Averell Harriman’s mother funded the launch of the race-science movement in America
in 1910, and built the Eugenics Record Office as a branch of the Galton National
Laboratory in London. The Harrimans were responsible for the Bush family fortune and
they were close to another Bush family backer, George Herbert Walker (a relative by
marriage of Prescott Bush and grandfather to George Bush, who would go on to be
President of the United States).
By the late 19th century, some mentally ill people and children were being sterilised by
US health officials as a result of eugenics policies. The State of Indiana made the
sterilisation of the mentally ill and ‘undesirables’ compulsory and 475 men were
sterilised at the Indiana State Reformatory.
After the turn of the century, the Harrimans and Rockefellers spent more than $11
million to establish a eugenics research laboratory at Cold Springs Harbor on Long
Island, New York, close to the Dulles brothers’ estates. The study of eugenics was
encouraged at the Elite-controlled universities, such as Harvard, Columbia, and Cornell.
In Germany, the same line was taken by Ernst Haeckel, the mystic and Aryan master
race promoter, whose ideas would influence Hitler. Haeckel said it was the duty of a
nation to enforce breeding, and he and his supporters formed the Monist League to
promote their sick beliefs in Germany.
The first International Congress of Eugenics was held in London in 1912. Among its
directors were Winston Churchill and Alexander Graham Bell, inventor of the telephone.
By 1917, fifteen US States had eugenics laws, and all but a few of them made legal the
compulsory sterilisation of epileptics, the mentally ill and retarded, and regular
In 1932, a year before Hitler and Roosevelt came to power, the Harrimans helped to
organise the Third International Congress on Eugenics at the American Museum of
Natural History in New York. . . . These wealthy American families, like their
counterparts in Britain, feel themselves to be racially superior and they wish to protect
their racial purity. This— along with the pursuit of power, wealth, and influence— is the
reason why so many intermarriages take place within these families....
The aim of the eugenics movement was, and is, to create a Master Race by the
sterilisation and forced birth control of those races considered ‘inferior’.
The International Congress of Eugenics in New York in 1932 tackled the ‘problem’
(as they saw it) of African-Americans and other ‘inferior’ stock reproducing and
expanding their numbers. It was decided that the way to deal with this ‘danger’ to the
higher races (themselves) was through sterilisation and ‘cutting off the bad stock’.
The Congress was dedicated to the work of Averell Harriman’s mother and Averell did
his best to support the proceedings. He personally arranged for the Hamburg-Amerika
Shipping Line (controlled by himself, George Walker and Prescott Bush) to transport
Nazis from Germany to New York so they could take part in the Congress. The best
known of them was Dr. Ernst Rudin, a psychiatrist at the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute for
Genealogy and Demography in Berlin. There he occupied an entire floor with his
eugenics ‘research’, and all of this was made possible by funds provided by ... the
Dr. Rudin was unanimously elected president of the International Federation of
Eugenics Societies at the New York Congress, and this was, in part, a recognition of
his work as a founder of the German Society for Race Hygiene.
The eugenics movement called for the sterilisation of mental patients (mental hygiene
societies); the execution of criminals, the insane, and the terminally ill (euthanasia
societies); and race purification by sterilization and the prevention of births to those
considered inferior bloodstocks (population control societies). All of this was up and
running long before anyone had heard of Adolf Hitler and the Nazis. Hitler’s Germany
was a vehicle for part of this movement; it wasn’t the whole movement.
Soon after Hitler had abolished elections and became dictator of Germany in 1933, the
Rockefeller-funded Dr. Rudin was commissioned to write the “Law for the Prevention
of Hereditary Diseases in Posterity”, which involved the forced sterilisation of anyone
considered genetically inferior. A quarter of a million people who were mental patients,
blind, deaf, or alcoholics were sterilised on the order of special eugenics courts....
But where did the Nazi Rudin get his inspiration from for the wording of his race laws?
From the Model Eugenical Sterilization Law of 1922, presented by H.H. Laughlin,
the eugenics ‘expert’ of the US House of Representatives Committee on
Immigration and Nationalisation, which was accepted by many States.
Eugenics was not unique to Nazi Germany. In 1942, the American ‘psychiatrist’ Foster
Kennedy called for the killing of retarded children, and between 1941 and ‘43
more than 42,000 people were sterilised in America.
Nor did the master race mentality end in 1945 with the demise of Hitler’s Germany.
Obviously, talk of master races, racial purity, and sterilisation to improve the stock was
bad PR, once some of the tales of Nazi projects began to be known. But all that
happened was that the names for master race policies were changed to disguise the
We began to hear about euthanasia and population control instead of eugenics and
race purification, but it’s all the same thing really. What the Harrimans, Rockefellers,
and people like Prescott Bush were funding and supporting before and during the war,
their successors have continued to promote under the cover of ‘acceptable’ language.
For instance, one of the people who worked with the Harrimans and Prescott Bush in
their funding of Hitler was William H. Draper Jr., the man who helped to fund the Nazi
cartels and was then appointed by Roosevelt after the war to decide what should be
done with them.
Draper, a close associate of Averell Harriman, was a major funder of the International
Eugenics Congress before the war and was one of those responsible for making Dr.
Ernst Rudin, the head of the world eugenics movement. In 1958, Draper was
appointed to chair a committee which was advising President Dwight Eisenhower on the
use of military aid to other countries.
This appointment was made possible by Prescott Bush, who was then a US Senator
for Connecticut. Bush was a regular golf partner of the president and of National
Security Advisor Gordon Gray (a close friend and eugenics promoter).
By now, John Foster Dulles (Bush’s former lawyer during the funding of Hitler) was the
Secretary of State, and his brother, Allen Dulles (formerly with Schroder, Hitler’s
personal bankers) was head of the CIA.
To put it mildly, a eugenics enthusiast like Draper had many people around him of like
mind. This allowed him to change the whole thrust of his committee from that of
advising on military aid to campaigning on the threat of the ‘population explosion’. His
committee formulated plans to depopulate the poorer countries: i.e. those people who
do not have white skins. The growth of such peoples, said Draper, was a threat to the
national security of the United States.
Eisenhower dismissed Draper’s proposals, but with support from his fellow racial purity
fanatics, he went on to found the Population Crisis Committee/’Draper Fund’,
which— together with the Rockefeller and DuPont families— continued to
promote eugenics under the guise of population control.
Draper was advisor to President Lyndon Johnson on this subject and that
administration began to use the overseas aid programme to fund birth control in
Another of Draper’s like-minds in American politics was to be Prescott’s son, George
Bush, a vocal supporter of General Draper’s policies. Bush arranged hearings as early
as 1969 into the dangers posed by the birth of too many black babies.
Draper’s son and heir, William H. Draper III, was co-chairman for finance and head
of fundraising for the George Bush For President campaign in 1980.
Later in that decade, Bush persuaded Ronald Reagan to appoint the younger Draper to
be administrator of the United Nations Development Programme, an organisation
connected with the World Bank and charged with supervising population control!
Eugenics and master race policies were passed on across the generations of these
ruling families of the Elite. During George Bush’s tenure in the White House, the
population control element of the aid budget soared. His legal counsel from 1980 was
Boyden Gray, who became the chief legal advisor to the President during the Bush
Gray would have been able to give him plenty of advice on population control. When
Boyden was a boy after the war, his father, Gordon Gray (Prescott Bush’s close
friend), launched the project which provided the basis of today’s global sterilisation
In 1946, the eugenics movement was trying to rebuild itself in the wake of the rather
unfortunate publicity aroused by on of its chief advocates, Adolf Hitler. During the war,
The Sterilization League of America had changed its name to Birthright Inc., and
was now looking for a means to get back to business.
Its efforts to relaunch itself in Iowa ended when a young boy died during a sterilisation
operation and the bad publicity brought an end to the plan. Instead they moved to Gray
family territory in North Carolina.
Gordon Gray had founded the Bownam Gray (Memorial) Medical School in Winston-Salem. It was named after Boyden’s grandfather, who had owned the R.J. Reynolds
The school became a centre for eugenics. It compiled extensive records of families
carrying ‘inherited diseases’, and it began a project which ... get this ... forcibly sterilised
young children who were not considered to be of a high enough IQ.
No, no. I am not talking about Nazi Germany during the war; I am talking about
the United States of America in 1946-1947!
Boyden Gray’s great aunt, Alice Shelton Gray, founded the Human Betterment
League (the North Carolina branch of the national eugenics sterilisation movement),
and she was the official supervisor of the master race experiment that was begun at the
Grays’ ‘medical school’.
Others involved were Dr. Claude Nash Herndon, the assistant director of ‘medical
genetics’ at the school, and Dr. Clarence Gamble (the heir to the Proctor and
Gamble soap empire), who was the chief of ‘national field operations’.
Children enrolled in the Winston-Salem school district were given ‘intelligence
tests’ and those who fell below the mark considered acceptable to these bizarre
people were sterilised.
Their recommendations were passed to the State Eugenics Board, which had the
authority to order sterilisation under North Carolina law. Dr. Claude Nash Herdon
talked of his work in an interview in 1990 which was reported in George Bush, The
“...IQ tests were run on all the children in the Winston-Salem school system. Only the
ones who scored really low [were targeted for sterilisation], the real bottom of the barrel,
like below 70. Did we do sterilizations on young children? Yes. This was a relatively
minor operation. ... It was usually not [done] until the child was eight or ten years old.
For the boys, you just make an incision and tie the tube. ... We more often performed
the operation on girls than with boys. Of course, you have to cut open the abdomen,
but again, it is relatively minor.”
Oh, that’s OK then. What were the media doing while all this was going on? Not a lot,
it turns out. Dr. Herndon talked of their “good relationship” with the press. This is less
surprising when you realize that Gordon Gray owned the Winston-Salem Journal, the
Twin City Sentinel and the radio station WSJS.
Eugenics was being promoted on a wide scale after the war in the guise of population
control, just as it is today. In the early 50s, when John Foster Dulles was chairman of
the tax-exempt New World Order front, the Rockefeller Foundation, he travelled with
John D. Rockefeller III on a number of world tours campaigning for policies to stem
the expansion of the non-white populations.
In November 1952, Dulles and Rockefeller launched the Population Council with tens
of millions of dollars provided by the Rockefeller family. The American Eugenics
Society left its old headquarters at Yale University, the home of the sinister Skull and
Bones Society, and moved in with the Population Council. The two organisations, in
effect, became one.
The first president of the Population Council was Frederick Osborne, the long-time
secretary of the American Eugenics Society. The child-steriliser of North Carolina,
Dr. Claude Nash Herndon, was made president of the Eugenics Society in 1953.
When George Bush became ambassador to the United Nations in 1972, he and his
clique in the US Agency for International Development arranged the first official
contract between the American government and the Sterilization League of America,
which had, by then, changed its name yet again, to the Association for Voluntary
Under this contract, the US government (taxpayers) began to fund this organisation to
do in non-white countries of the world what it had already done to children in North
In 1988, the year George Bush was elected president, another contract was arranged
which involved the American taxpayer spending $80 million over five years to expand
this work in 58 countries in Asia, Africa, and Spanish-America. Millions have been
sterilised and most of it has been funded by the taxpayer.
Other countries do the same. And by the way, Dr. Clarence Gamble, the sterilising
enthusiast from the Proctor and Gamble soap family and the Bowman Gray Medical
School, as also enjoyed funding from the USAID budget.
His so-called Pathfinder Fund is paid to infiltrate non-white societies and break down
resistance to sterilisation.
The Planned Parenthood Federation, which has been supported at every opportunity
by George Bush and the manipulating Elite, was actually founded in London, at the
offices of the British Eugenics Society....
Global centralisation of power, fundamental control of the minds and bodies of
the mass population, and the creation of a master race.
These are the themes that span the centuries and they still dominate the secret agenda
today, which is manipulating our lives....
May 15, 2003
Emily's List: Is It Over Between Us?
by Sandra E. Jewell
It was too good to last. When Emily's List was born in 1985 pro-choice Democratic
women for the first time had a national PAC that would help send people just like them
to Washington. The euphoria!
But last year most of the now-powerful women Emily's List boosted in their
scramble to the Senate voted in favor of an unprovoked war against Iraq.
It was clearly past time for a closer look at their voting records.
Elected Democrats almost always receive high ratings from civil rights and public
interest groups, but a close look at the particulars of their records can be jarring. In the
107th Congress, for example, Dianne Feinstein (CA) and Hillary Clinton (NY) voted
against bankruptcy protection for the poor. Who knew?
Emily's List also helped finance the election of Senator Debbie Stabenow (MI) so that
she could vote against food safety and for the nuclear industry; for Senators Patty
Murray and Maria Cantwell, both from Washington State, who cast numerous votes
for Fast Track and nuclear subsidies as did now-former Senator Jean Carnahan
(MO) who also voted to open ANWR for oil drilling...
I can't speak for all of Emily's List contributors, but the positions taken by these elected
officials are not what I expected when I sent my checks. So what happened? Well, it
seems that Emily's List does not track any aspect of candidates' agendas beyond
reproductive rights because, as I was told, the PAC doesn't want to "lobby" the
candidates. Say, what? Political money with almost no strings attached?
Ellen Malcolm concedes that women care about issues in addition to reproductive
rights, and Emily's List prepares campaign materials that reflect those, but candidates
don't have to sign on or use these materials. Oh. That is the apparent reason why the
pro choice Democratic women elected with bundles of checks from thousands of
contributors feel free to bail on so many crucial issues..
Although the goal of Emily's List to elect pro choice Democratic women has never
varied, it's only now that some of its core constituents are rousing to the fact that pro
choice does not mean progressive, and that the Lists' objectives do not include any
hint of a mandate to support the best person for the job.
When Emily's List candidates take positions less egalitarian than those of their male
opponents, it's clear that, contrary to what donors may think, the candidate's gender
was her one essential attribute and neither her politics nor good sense were
allowed to intervene....
And one more question: In the complex world of Washington politics, how is it that a
sophisticated women's PAC cannot make the trade offs and do the horse trading
necessary to further its own ends. Has anyone figured, for example, the political cost-benefit of supporting Nancy Kaszak, who lost to Rahm Emanuel in the Illinois
If their current uphill struggle to re-up women like me is any indication, it might be a
good idea if they started soon.
Sandy Jewell (firstname.lastname@example.org) is a public health professional in Atlanta.
September 22, 2002
Emily's List Hissed
Fellow Democrats criticize the women candidates' PAC
By Garance Franke-Ruta
In early August, a months-long whispering campaign against Emily's List hit the pages
of Roll Call. In an article headlined "Making Enemies," four anonymous Democratic
consultants and operatives took turns criticizing the 17-year-old political action
committee (PAC) -- the largest source of Democratic hard money around -- for wasting
Democrats' time, money and effort by forcing competitive primary races that the group
was bound, from the outset, to lose.
That same day, CNN Crossfire co-host and former Clinton adviser Paul Begala took the
campaign onto the air. " The feminist fund-raising group Emily's List is in a lot of trouble
right now for taking on my pal from the Clinton administration, Rahm Emanuel, and
Michigan Democrat John Dingell," Begala said, according to a show transcript.
"Now, I wonder if Emily's List contributors wouldn't rather see their money spent
helping, say, Mary Landrieu, one of the few women in the Senate, keep her seat. Well,
no dice, says Emily's List. Senator Landrieu, you see, supported the ban on
partial-birth abortion. Doesn't matter that her Republican opponents support a total
ban on all abortions. Wasn't it Santayana who said: 'Fanaticism consists of redoubling
your efforts after you've lost sight of your aim'?"
Robert Novak brightened as Begala twisted the knife. "Paul," said the conservative
Crossfire commentator, "when I see a Clintonite like yourself attacking the Emily's List, I
love it. Trouble in the leper colony."
Trouble indeed. Republicans have vowed to pour money into Louisiana to unseat
Landrieu, who was narrowly elected in 1996 with the backing of Emily's List, in order to
retake the Senate. Emily's List, which supports only pro-choice Democratic women,
announced in 1997 that it would no longer fund Landrieu thanks to her vote for an
amended ban on the so-called partial-birth procedure.
So Landrieu, the first woman senator from the South elected in her own right, will need
all the Democratic Party dollars she can get. She's forged new alliances within the
party, endorsed Dingell (who also supported the ban on partial-birth abortion) in the
Michigan contest and joined a group of prominent Democratic women who held a
Washington fundraiser for him last April.
But some Democratic operatives who have followed the controversy around Emily's List
believe that most of it can be traced back to the Emanuel campaign and Emanuel's
Clinton-administration allies. Instead of ceding the working-class Chicago District to the
well-financed, well-connected former Clinton adviser, Emily's List backed his challenger,
Nancy Kaszak, and ran tough ads against him. All told, the primary cost upward of $2
million, making it one of the most expensive in the city's history.
"I think the big problem and the reason we are seeing these criticisms is because we
ran in two primary races against Democratic men, Rahm Emanuel and John Dingell,
who have a tremendous number of friends in the press and inside Washington," says
Ellen R. Malcolm, founder and president of Emily's List. "Paul can take care of his pals
and Emily's List will take care of the gals."
Founded in 1985 to elect pro-choice Democratic women to public office, Emily's List
identifies promising candidates and raises early money for them. But in an environment
where massive PACs back slates of candidates, primary elections have been
transformed into something more like European-style multiparty elections, with Emily's
List playing the role of Women's Party. Emily's List generates criticism when its goal of
electing pro-choice Democratic women runs counter to the broader Democratic party's
goal of minimizing pricey, politically bruising primaries in order to retake the House and
keep the Senate....
The Emanuel campaign maintains a studious public neutrality on the topic of Emily's
List. "[Emanuel] is completely focused on the district and the voters of the district and is
not going to get involved in Washington, D.C., games," says Becky Carroll,
communications director for the campaign.
But, as is so common in Washington, once someone opens the door to criticism, others
walk through it more easily. The Republican-affiliated National Rifle Association now
brags -- somewhat creepily -- that it will shoot down Emily's List's entirely female slate
of candidates in race after primary race.... And several Democratic aides interviewed --
none of whom have strong ties to the Emanuel or Dingell campaigns -- have also
expressed concern that the group isn't helping the Democrats save their firepower for
the general elections. Now progressive Democratic political consultants have begun to
privately grouse about Emily's List's backing of pro-choice, centrist women, thereby
complicating the ambitions of their pro-labor, pro-choice (and sometimes pro-life) men.
Certainly, some of the concern that Emily's List forces expensive, highly competitive
primaries would have died down had the group's favored candidates not also lost six of
the nine congressional primary races in which they have run this election cycle....
In Emanuel versus Kaszak, the Illinois AFL-CIO backed Emanuel, even though he
was one of the architects of the North American Free Trade Agreement and
Kaszak had a strong pro-labor history. Bill Looby, a spokesman for the Illinois AFL-CIO,
explained the group's rationale in The Nation last winter: "[Kaszak] had the good labor
record, but [Emanuel] had the record of knowing his way around Washington. The
feeling was, [Emanuel] could be more effective in Washington."
In the Dingell-Rivers contest, Dingell found powerful support among the United Auto
Workers, which mobilized a get-out-the-vote effort for him in Michigan's newly formed
15th District. In the state's gubernatorial contest, Emily's List-backed state Attorney
General Jennifer Granholm ran tough in a competitive three-way primary contest
against liberal former Gov. James J. Blanchard and progressive, pro-life former Rep.
David Bonior, a onetime House Democratic whip who was backed by both the uaw and
the AFL-CIO. Granholm's solid victory in that high-profile race -- she is favored to win
the general election as well -- was Emily's List's first big win since Linda Sanchez took
California's newly created 39th District in March....
"Part of what's driving the unions crazy is, because Emily's List only funds women, they
get into these races and they provide enormous financial resources only to the women
candidates even when the male candidates are more progressive," says one
Democratic campaign consultant. "This gossip that's going around is not accidental."
While Emily's List-backed candidates suffered a string of losses in the spring, they are
poised to become the Democratic candidates in a number of gubernatorial races. That's
led some to suggest that 2002 may be "the year of the woman governor."
If O'Brien wins her primary, she will join Granholm and state Insurance Commissioner
Kathleen Sebelius in Kansas, who have already won theirs with support from Emily's
List. Former U.S. Attorney General Janet Reno in Florida, Lt. Gov. Kathleen Kennedy
Townsend in Maryland, attorney Kathleen Falk in Wisconsin, former state Sen. Myrth
York in Rhode Island and state Attorney General Janet Napolitano in Arizona are also
highly competitive candidates in their own gubernatorial primary battles. Several of the
candidates, such as Granholm, Sebelius and Napolitano, also are well-positioned to win
Malcolm predicts an end to the carping with the end of the primary season. "We'll all
unite, and then Emily's List will be attacked by the Republicans and the NRA and all of
those groups," she says. But if Emily's List can't break it's losing streak come
November, that unity may prove short-lived.
February 6, 2001
Ethics group wants
limits on Washington
By Richard Borreca, Star-Bulletin
The state Ethics Commission is trying again to limit the political uses of the state-supported governor's mansion, Washington Place.
The commission is asking that campaign activities, including soliciting votes and raising
money, be specifically prohibited.
"Washington Place is a state facility, which is supported by state tax dollars," the
commission notes in a letter to the Legislature.
The proposed law would also reverse a 1978 ethics commission opinion that said
Washington Place was a personal residence and permitted the governor to hold
campaign functions and fund-raisers there.
First lady Vicky Cayetano, however, said that both her husband, Gov. Ben Cayetano,
and former Gov. John Waihee have had policies that the historic Beretania Street
mansion should not be used for fund raising of any sort.
"I don't think it is appropriate to have fund-raisers in the home of the former queen," she
The Ethics Commission added that if Washington Place were to be used for political
fund-raisers, "public confidence in government would be seriously undermined."
Dan Mollway, Ethics Commission executive director, said the commission's proposal
would stop campaign coffee hours or meetings, if the purpose was to raise money and
convince people to vote for someone.
In 1996, the state Republican Party filed a protest with the Ethics Commission when Lt.
Gov. Mazie Hirono used Washington Place for a fund-raiser for a Democratic women's
group, EMILY's List.
Hirono's office said the mainland group had asked her to host the event and she didn't
know it was a fund-raiser.
The first lady was also surprised in 1998 when the Sisterhood of Temple Emanu-El
sponsored a Passover Seder dinner at Washington Place and charged $45 and $75 to
At the time, she said Washington Place is to be used only as a site for meetings or
special events, but not to raise money.
Cayetano said yesterday that the Ethics Commission proposal should carefully define
what is a campaign activity, or it would stop a new governor from having any political
discussions with advisers or supporters at Washington Place. "The intent is good, but
they should define campaign activity," she added.
November 8, 2000
China’s Brutal One-Child Policy. . . .
“BOYCOTT THE PHARMACEUTICAL
BUTCHERS OF BEIJING!”
By Michelle Malkin, Midweek
Is there a protester out there brave enough to wear that phrase on a T-shirt? Search
high and low, but you will not find any ... activists criticizing communist China’s peddlers
of RU-486, the abortion pill.
The Washington Post reported recently that the Hua Lian Pharmaceutical Co, a govt-owned firm outside of Shanghai, will manufacture Mifepristone— the raw compound
for RU-486— for sale in the United States. The firm is one of three in China that makes
the drug. It won U.S. approval to produce and export abortion drug ingredients here
thanks to financial help from population control fanatics at the Rockefeller Foundation.
Pro-abortion groups are ecstatic. But while American women celebrate their newly-acquired “choice,” millions of pregnant women in China are forced to swallow the
poison pill against their will. It is no small coincidence that RU-486 was originally
developed by a drug company whose parent corporation manufactured Zyklon B —
the poison gas used in Nazi concentration camps to destroy millions of unwanted
Family-planning propagandists in China slyly echo the liberating rhetoric of their U.S.
“RU-486 has given women more choices, and it’s been beneficial to women’s health,”
Gao Ersheng, director of the Shanghai Institute of Planned Parenthood Research,
told the Post. “Most unmarried women prefer Mifepristone, which is less painful and
more private than surgical abortions,” Gao told The New York Times.
Preferences? Pain? Privacy?
Since when did Chinese family-planning bureaucrats care about any of those things?
Certainly not since they instituted the one-child policy in 1979. An army of 200,000
officials and a million volunteers who comprise “street committees” snoop on the fertility
of Chinese citizens. The government keeps dossiers tracking women’s menstrual
All women who “choose” to undergo surgical abortions “prefer” to do so without
Out of an estimated 10 million abortions performed in China each year, the
Washington Post reports, about half of those that are performed in the cities use RU-486. The other five million women undergo such methods as saline injections to induce
miscarriage; Ribalor injections, which cause congestive heart failure in the unborn baby,
who is then delivered dead; or partial-birth abortions in which doctors inject
formaldehyde into a baby’s soft spot as the child crowns during delivery.
“Neither abortion nor RU-486 is a subject for moral debate in China in the way it is in
the United States,” the Post noted. There is no debate in China about anything. When
a family disagrees with the government’s diagnosis, the consequences are hellish—
ranging from back-breaking fines and forced sterilization to mass infanticide. . . .
If you think government-sponsored baby-killing no longer happens in 21st century China,
you missed last month’s international headlines: “Chinese officials drown baby in front
of parents.” Huang Quisheng, a rural farmer, told London reporters how family
planners had tried to induce a miscarriage in his eight-months-pregnant wife by
injecting saline solution into her womb.
Against the odds, their baby son survived and was born healthy.
But, as Huang recounted: “They grabbed him from me and threw him to the floor
and kicked him several times. We were ordered to go home as they took him to
the back of the government building and drowned him...”
The enforcers of this brutal regime will now reap profits by selling their deadly
abortion pills to the United States. Feminists embrace them; the White House
toasts them; a bipartisan Congress rewards them with a multibillion-dollar trade
The laboratories of an evil empire churn and bellow as millions of Chinese parents
And where are America’s human rights activists?
Boycotting Happy Meals, sneakers and Kathie Lee....
The Real Planned Parenthood Agenda
"Only an utterly ruthless, steely-nerved manipulator such as Sanger could have
parlayed a daring, New-Age style immorality into a massive, multi-billion dollar
enterprise so immensely powerful that in many countries (the U.S. included) it
is...like a government within a government."
– Bernard Nathanson, MD, Pro-life former abortionist
~ ~ ~
They're big. They're strong. They're powerful. They have an influential presence in
every state. They're widely respected and revered.
And they're one of America's greatest threats to the right to life.
The Planned Parenthood Federation of America, which operates on a current
massive annual budget of more than $504 million (an increase of $27 million from the
previous year) and has local affiliates all across Pennsylvania and state affiliates
nationwide, has a record for ending the lives of unborn children that is unmatched by
any other institution in the free world.
Founded by Margaret Sanger, who wrote in her book Women and the New Race, "The
most merciful thing that the large family does to one of its infant members is to kill it,"
Planned Parenthood continues to annually increase its involvement in doing abortions.
While the national abortion rate decreases, PPFA's piece of the pie grows ever larger.
Planned Parenthood did 133,289 abortions at its centers in 1994, and 139,899 in 1995,
and 153,367 in 1996.
Planned Parenthood referred women elsewhere for an additional 98,325 abortions in
1994 and 59,682 in 1995.
In 1996, they referred women who didn't want to parent their babies for adoption only
6,274 times, giving them a 22-to-1 ratio in favor of abortion over adoption for women
who went to them for "help."
This emphasis on abortion as the solution to problem pregnancies is also shown in a
report from the General Accounting Office which showed that pregnant women who go
to Planned Parenthood for counseling abort seven times more often than women who
go to other "family planning" agencies.
What's worse, annually as much as $171.9 million of Planned Parenthood's
funding comes from your taxes in the form of government contracts and grants.
Their other funding comes from income from the clinics ($180.5 million annually),
private and corporate contributions ($122.7 million annually) and other sources.
In addition to activities directly related to doing and promoting abortions, Planned
Parenthood acts as one of the most powerful lobbying organizations in favor of
abortion on demand. PPFA's annual report from 1993-94 reported on eight pending
lawsuits against state regulations of abortion, including four cases in which PPFA was
petitioning the courts to be given public funds that democratically elected state
legislatures had refused to administer to them.
In Pennsylvania, Planned Parenthood seemed to have a real problem with parents, as
they sued the state, holding up legislation allowing parental involvement in minors'
abortion decisions for five years in the courts, at great cost to taxpayers....
(Source - PA Pro-Life Federation) Contact us at: email@example.com
* * *
Get the Facts on Planned Parenthood
by Brian Clowes, PhD
Human Life International has long been at the forefront of the battle against the
Planned Parenthood Federation of America (PPFA), by exposing its true anti-life
agenda throughout the world.
Most of our readers know that PPFA is a pro-abortion group and that it commits surgical
abortions on a large scale. But not all yet realize the insidious nature of PPFA and its
horrific impact on society as the behemoth of the abortion industry.
In the United States, about 20,000 staff and volunteers operate 142 Planned
Parenthood affiliates and their 900 clinics, 130 of which commit surgical abortions.
In 1996, PPFA recorded an income of over half a billion dollars, one-third of which
was taken out of taxpayers’ pockets.
In the same year, the organization committed 153,367 surgical abortions and referred
54,207 more; administered nearly a million pregnancy tests; had nearly two million birth
control customers; filed suit against dozens of pro-life laws; and pushed explicit sex
education programs all over the country....
These numbers give some idea of the colossal impact that Planned Parenthood has on
millions of people every year, and tragically our youth....
PPFAs Involvement in Surgical and Chemical Abortion
In 1984, Faye Wattleton, then-President of PPFA, said "We know that the abortion
issue is our issue." Abortion has always been Planned Parenthood’s number one
On 1 July 1970, the state of New York legalized abortion. PPFA was so eager to begin
exterminating preborn lives that it committed its first abortion the very next day. It now
owns the biggest chain of abortion factories in the country and has committed nearly
two and a half million abortions in the last 28 years——a number equivalent to the
populations of St. Louis, San Diego, Phoenix, Pittsburgh or Baltimore.
Ever anxious to exploit new ways of exterminating the preborn, PPFA now pushes so-called "post-coital contraception" in a big way. The group recommends "doubling up"
on birth control pills in order to enhance their abortifacient effect to end the life of an
early developing human being. In 1996, PPFA gave this abortifacient to nearly 30,000
women, and will administer it to 50,000 more this year.
It is also beginning to administer methotrexate/misoprostol ("MTX") chemical abortions,
and has declared its intention to distribute the RU-486 abortion pill on a massive scale
as soon as it becomes available.
To show how lopsidedly it emphasizes only one choice——abortion——PPFA commits
or refers ten surgical abortions for each referral for prenatal care or adoption.
PPFA’s Aggressive Pro-Abortion Litigation
Planned Parenthood has demonstrated its absolute commitment to abortion by acting
as a plaintiff in hundreds of lawsuits against pro-life laws in almost every state, even
when such laws are supported by the vast majority of the people and the state
A Planned Parenthood executive was the plaintiff in the 1965 Supreme Court case that
discovered the mythical "right to privacy"——Griswold v. Connecticut. Today, PPFA
fights any limits on abortion, regardless of how trivial they are. It has opposed informed
consent laws, waiting periods for minors, parental or spousal consent or notification,
decent burial or cremation for aborted preborn babies, and even attempts to set
standards for the licensing of abortion mills, which would safeguard the health of
Planned Parenthood has even challenged bans on third-trimester D&X abortions in
several states. It also puts the lie to its claim to be a "pro-choice" group, since the only
‘‘choice’’ it supports is abortion. It has attempted to force the Roman Catholic Church
to provide abortions to children in its care and has even gone to court to force high
school student newspapers to accept its advertisements.
In 1970, Planned Parenthood first began receiving government money when its clinic
in Corpus Christi, Texas, received $7,000 in government support. Since then, PPFA
has swallowed more than $3.9 billion (in 1998 dollars) of our federal, state and local
tax dollars in the relentless pursuit of its comprehensive anti-life agenda. In 1996
alone, PPFA received $177.5 million from federal, state and local governments.
Since 1970, Federal Title X grants have been the largest single source of PPFA’s
income from outside sources, and it now receives over $40 million annually from this
In light of the fact that PPFA annually rakes in tens of millions of dollars by selling
abortions and makes tens of millions more by selling birth control devices at a huge
markup, we must ask why American taxpayers—especially those who are pro-life—should continue to subsidize an organization that obviously can very easily support
This vast Title X government subsidy allows PPFA to pay its operatives staggering
salaries. For example, in 1995, PPFA’s then-President, Pamela Maraldo, received a
$251,538 salary, and at least four PPFA vice presidents and other officers received
salaries ranging between $151,000 and $189,000.
Faye Wattleton said of PPFA: "We are not going to be an organization promoting
celibacy or chastity."
Soon after the 1973 Roe v. Wade abortion decision, Planned Parenthood’s Alan
Guttmacher revealed one of the primary purposes of value-free sex education when he
admitted that "The only avenue the International Planned Parenthood Federation and
its allies could travel to win the battle for abortion on demand is through sex education."
This makes perfect marketing sense, and positions Planned Parenthood to perpetuate
itself forever. First, it distributes grossly offensive sex education manuals throughout
the United States. Teens who might otherwise be chaste learn from these books that it
is "perfectly normal" to have sex, and so they visit the local Planned Parenthood clinic
and pick up contraceptives. When the contraceptives fail (as they frequently do,
especially among teens), then they return to the Planned Parenthood clinic for an
abortion or a referral for an abortion elsewhere.
This is a self-maintaining system that any marketer would be envious of: Make money
by creating the demand for your products and services, and then reap further profits
from selling them.
All of PPFA’s sex education manuals tell our children that they can embrace the
complete line of anti-life behavior and be guilt-free: fornication, masturbation,
contraception, abortion, pornography and homosexual acts. These manuals also
repeat the old Kinsey line that "humans are sexual beings from before birth until death."
For example, Planned Parenthood’s sex-ed text The New Positive Images talks about
"erections of penis" and "possibility of orgasm" — to three-year-old children.
In addition to promoting immorality, Planned Parenthood has vigorously attacked sex
education programs that teach any standard of morality. PPFA has filed lawsuits whose
purpose is to ban effective abstinence-based sex education programs from high
schools, on the grounds that they "violate the separation of church and state" by
teaching a "religious point of view" ——i.e., chastity and self-control.
This proves that PPFA believes such effective programs are threats to its income and
influence. After all, Planned Parenthood doesn’t make any money from kids practicing
The objections that most pro-life organizations raise against Planned Parenthood are
not only religious in nature, but profoundly practical as well. The natural and inevitable
consequences of the permissive agenda pushed by PPFA and other anti-life groups are
devastating from a public health standpoint. Abortion, teen fornication, illegitimate
births, child abuse and child poverty, "shacking up," venereal diseases, and divorce
have increased tremendously since 1970.
These in turn have led to other baleful results, from millions more women and children
living in poverty to a general relaxing of moral standards and society’s willingness to
accept other atrocities such as physician-assisted suicide, cloning and frozen human
Planned Parenthood’s lavish funding also allows it to attack those who try to slow the
deterioration of the health and morals of our society. PPFA has attacked pro-lifers and
pro-life laws in the courts at all levels, thereby stripping any legal protection from pre-born babies and their defenders.
Every local pro-life group and individual that joins the battle against this anti-life monster
weakens it and ultimately makes it easier for all pro-lifers to do their jobs....
Learn more about Planned Parenthood.
Visit HLI’s Web site at http://www.hli.org
* * *
Cut Planned Parenthood Loose
from our Tax Dollars
© 1998 by David W. Neuendorf
Just three years ago, most of the world celebrated the fiftieth anniversary of the defeat
of Hitler's Third Reich, perpetrators of the Holocaust in Europe. This month marks the
twenty-fifth year of the continuing political battle over our American Holocaust: the
legalized murder by abortion of over 35 million unborn children.
The legalization of abortion in America was perpetrated by the Supreme Court in its
infamous decision in Roe vs. Wade. The organization most responsible for the cultural
and political changes leading to the court's decision is the Planned Parenthood
Federation of America. That organization is considered respectable by enough
Americans that they have been able to obtain significant (about one third of their
budget) funding through tax dollars.
Just how respectable is Planned Parenthood? Their status as one of the largest
abortion "providers" ought to say it all, but that isn't enough to convince most Americans
of the organization's depravity. Perhaps a brief glimpse at their history will open some
Planned Parenthood began life in 1921 as the American Birth Control League, the
brainchild of extreme leftist Margaret Sanger. It evolved through mergers and name
changes into what we know today as the Planned Parenthood Federation of
Sanger's lifelong ambition was to reduce the world's population, particularly that of the
poor and "unfit," through birth control. She also promoted contraception as the
means to free women from the natural consequences of the promiscuous lifestyle that
she openly practiced and recommended for everyone.
The views of Sanger's movement can be found throughout their publications. The Birth
Control Review was replete with articles advocating everything from freely available
contraception to involuntary sterilization for "dysgenic groups in our population."
The April 1933 issue of that publication was dedicated to the "science" of eugenics, or
selective breeding of human beings. It featured an article by Ernst Rudin, an official of
Hitler's NAZI regime....
Planned Parenthood will claim that some of Sanger's statements reflect opinions that
they no longer support. Certainly that is true in the case of abortion. Sanger publicly
disapproved of it; Planned Parenthood has established it as a major industry.
As for the idea that women should have control over their own bodies, and birth control
should always be voluntary, consider this statement from former Planned Parenthood
leader Alan Guttmacher:
"Each country will have to decide its own form of coercion, determining when and how
it should be employed...The means presently available are compulsory sterilization
and compulsory abortion."
I wish we had the space to elaborate much more on the history of this unholy
organization. If you have access to the Internet, you can find an amazing amount of
material on both sides of the issue.
For the case against Sanger and Planned Parenthood, start at Human Life
International's web site at http://www.hli.org and follow their various links.
Also check out Eugenics Watch at http://homepages.enterprise.net/eugenics/index.html
for some related material.
For the pro-Sanger view, try Planned Parenthood itself at
http://www.plannedparenthood.org, and the Sanger Papers Project at
I don't want my tax dollars to pay for any of the activities of an organization like
Planned Parenthood; nor do millions of other Americans.
Is it asking too much to require our opponents to raise their own funds for their
A fitting memorial to twenty five years of government sanctioned infanticide under Roe
vs. Wade would be for Congress to remove all federal funding from Planned
To go to Dave Neuendorf's Home Page
* * *
THE HISTORY OF PLANNED PARENTHOOD
by Mike Perry
“We are merely walking down the path that
Mrs. Sanger carved for us.”
--Dr. Alan Guttmacher, President of Planned Parenthood, 1962-74.
Planned Parenthood is powerful
It has the enthusiastic support of influential organizations and extensive connections
inside the government. It invariably gets favorable coverage in the news media and
each year it receives large sums of money from taxes and community charities. Yet the
public knows nothing about its history. This silence has a reason.
Rooted in Fear
In the years after World War I, a number of competing organizations formed to promote
birth control. The most controversial of these was the American Birth Control League
(ABCL). In 1933, Eleanor Dwight Jones, the President of ABCL, described the
organization's founders as "a devoted group of liberals and feminists led by Margaret
These organizations arose out of the fears of America's affluent, educated elite. To
have more money and time for themselves, they were having fewer children. As a
result they were alarmed by the high birth rates of poor and working-class people. They
considered the prolific poor, as Sanger put it, "the most far reaching peril to the future of
Two movements developed in response to these fears. Both considered the nation a
"race" that could be strengthened by keeping the birth rate of the "fit" (the affluent)
above that of the "unfit" (the poor). They differed only in whose birth rate they wanted
The eugenicists warned of "race suicide" if the nation's dominant group, educated
people of Northern European descent, did not increase its birthrate. President
Theodore Roosevelt expressed their view in March 1905 when he attacked women who
used birth control as "criminal against the race." This group wanted more children from
The other movement, birth controllers, was more attractive to feminists such as
Margaret Sanger. It did not demand that affluent women abandon careers for large
families. It planned to achieve race building by forcing down the birth rate of the
In her autobiography, Margaret Sanger summarized the differences between the two
movements: Eugenics without birth control seemed to me a house built upon
sands...The eugenicists wanted to shift the birth-control emphasis from less children for
the poor to more children for the rich. We went back of that and sought to stop the
multiplication of the unfit."
To stop this "multiplication," Sanger could be harsh. Her book The Pivot of Civilization
has a chapter called "The Cruelty of Charity." In it she blasts as "insidiously injurious"
programs to provide "medical and nursing facilities to slum mothers." Such programs
"facilitate the function of maternity" when "the absolute necessity is to discourage it."
Sanger believed that a poor woman who died in childbirth gave other poor women more
incentive to visit her conveniently located birth control clinics....
Shifting Targets Revealingly
The public relations consultant who recommended the name change was not the first to
suggest "Planned Parenthood" as a name. The suggestion came in a 1938 letter from
Dr. Lydia DeVilbiss, a Florida physician, birth controller and racist. Choosing a name
suggested by an open racist illustrates once again that the new name didn't mean a
Dr. DeVilbiss' influence also reflects a new priority. Racial minorities were now more
threatening than immigrants. The reason is obvious. The same elitist fears that
created the birth control movement also led to the restrictive 1924 immigration laws.
(Blocked from immigrating by elitist American anti-semitism, millions of Jews would die
under the Nazis.)
In its place came a new migration. The nation's black population was on the move. At
the turn of the century 90 percent of the nation's blacks lived in the South. But racism,
depression, and war industry brought them north, where they replaced immigrant
Catholics and Jews in the ghettos. By the 1960s half the nation's blacks would live
outside the South.
Similar conditions brought Hispanics to this country. Reaching these people with birth
control required new tactics. As the 1940 symposium title hints, "race building" in a
democracy has to be subtle. Coercion cannot be overt. Deception must take the place
of force. The victims must never know they are a target.
A number of tactics were used to deceive the victims.
First, birth controllers hoped (correctly) that black leaders would be easier to manipulate
than Catholic leaders had been. The movement planned to win black cooperation by
placing blacks in highly visible positions.
Sanger described this to Clarence Gamble in October 1939. In that letter she
described how "colored Ministers, preferably with social service backgrounds" could
be used and added ominously, "We do not want word to go out that we want to
exterminate the Negro population and the minister is the man who can straighten
out the idea if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members."
Clarence Gamble advocated the same tactic in a private memo that year when he
said, "There is a great danger that we will fail because the Negroes think it a plan for
extermination. Hence lets appear to let the colored think it run it as we appear to let
south do the conference at Atlanta."
Under this policy PPFA hired a full-time "Negro Consultant" in 1944....
The Stage Is Set
The stage was set for a new strategy. Support from the wealthy and powerful was
assured. As in the days of Moses and the Pharaoh, such people were eager to curtail
the birth rates of the poor and socially troublesome.
The cooperation of the news media could be counted on. Given the large minority
populations of most big cities, journalists who never exposed the ugly anti-immigrant
bigotry of the earlier "race building" birth controllers could be relied on to keep silent
about Planned Parenthood's new agenda and particularly its impact on black and
The Play Begins
The play began in earnest during the 1960s and was motivated by several factors.
First, the civil rights movement eliminated the worst aspects of Southern racism. The
Northern liberal elite supported civil rights, in part, to reduce the pressures driving
blacks northward. (As a number of blacks have noted, liberals never displayed much
enthusiasm for combating Northern racism.) This paralleled the post-World War I tactic
of restricting immigration and then forcing down birth rates. In a 1926 speech at
Vassar, Sanger spoke of that very tactic when she said that the nation needed to follow
the "drastic immigration laws" of 1924 with methods "to cut down on the rapid
multiplication of the unfit and undesirable at home."
Second, during the fifties Planned Parenthood had purred contentedly at the high birth
rate of white suburbia. Its eugenic ("more from the fit") side was in control. But after the
advent of the birth control pill in 1960, middle-class birth rates plummeted. As a result,
the birth rates of racial (black and Hispanic) and religious (conservative Catholic and
Protestant) minorities became disproportionately high.
The "less from the unfit" side of Planned Parenthood again became dominant. In the
latter half of the 1960s, Planned Parenthood and similar groups spent millions of
dollars promoting the idea that the U.S. was in the midst of a dangerous population
The idea was so absurd it could be disproved in five minutes at any public library.
Caught up in the hysteria, however, the nation's news media never questioned why
groups were warning of a "population bomb" in the midst of plummeting birth rates....
All the public warnings of a "population explosion" hid the real agenda, reducing the
birth rates of socially troublesome groups.
The problem was compounded by a third factor, the "sexual revolution" of the late
1960s. High rates of promiscuity meant still more troublesome births in both the white
and black communities....
A highly powerful and highly privileged group, abortion supporters fear any social
change that might alter their advantaged circumstances. In their efforts to maintain the
demographic status quo in spite of their low birth rate, Planned Parenthood is one of
their most useful weapons. Christianity, on the other hand, is one of their most potent
(The original research for this article began during graduate work in Biomedical History
at the University of Washington's medical school.)
~ ~ ~
About The Author: Mike Perry is a free-lance writer and historian. He is currently
writing a book describing the Nazi indoctrination of German youth; it is tentatively
entitled From the Tenderest Years.
The Population Council - On Sept 28, 2000, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration
approved the “abortion pill” RU-486 for use in the United States.
This represents the first time in our nation’s history that our government has ever
approved a drug for the specific purpose of taking the life of another human
~ ~ ~
From Population Council web site:
Our Mission . . . to improve the well-being and reproductive health of current and
future generations and to help achieve a humane, equitable, and sustainable
balance people and resources.
What is the Population Council?
We are an international, nonprofit institution that conducts research on three fronts:
biomedical, social science, and public health. This research— and the information
it produces— helps change the way people think about problems related to
reproductive health and population growth....
Who started the Council, and why?
The Council was established in 1952 by John D. Rockefeller 3rd, to search for a better
understanding of problems relating to population. A humanitarian, Mr. Rockefeller was
deeply affected by trips to densely populated regions of South and East Asia in 1950,
where millions of people were living at subsistence level and the population was
What is the Council’s budget?
Our 1999 expenditures were US $66.7 million . . . The budget for 2000 is US $76
$ $ $
And where did the $66.7 million expenditures in 1999 come from? According to
the Council, 3% came from Multilateral Organizations; 6% came from Foreign
Governments; 12% came from Internal Funds; 20% came from (unnamed)
Nongovernmental Organizations and Individuals; and
59% CAME FROM U.S. TAXPAYERS!
~ ~ ~
And how were our tax dollars spent?
According to the Population Council’s 1999 Annual Financial Report, $37,188,000 went
to “International Programs”; $13,033,000 went to the Center for Biomedical Research;
$4,753,000 went to “Policy Research Division”; $359,000 went to “Distinguished
Colleagues”; $1,289,000 went to Publications; $9,581,000 went to Management &
General Services; and $515,000 went to Fundraising.
~ ~ ~
And before actually spending our tax dollars,
where did they repose?
Well, the website doesn’t say, but I suspect that a good number of them were having
fun in the sun in the Cayman Islands or some other off-shore tax-haven, or residing in
the Bank of New York, Citibank or other insider-favored institution.
What this non-profit, tax exempt entity does tell us, however, is that in 1999 they had
total assets of $176,280,000. Of this total, $110,049,000 was in Cash and Investments.
They also tell us that investment managers received 1% (or around $1,104,900
according to my fourth-grade fuzzy math) for the privilege of taking care of all this
(former) taxpayer money.
And, for this handsome sum you would think that these wise old financial owls would
earn an equally handsome return on investments in the raging bull market of 1999,
wouldn’t you? Well, according to my fuzzy Economy 101 reading of the financial
statements, these experts had a Net Unrealized Loss in Fair Value of Investments of
$9,077,000 for the year.
~ ~ ~
Al Gore, speaking at the 1st Presidential Debate, and promising that he’ll defend the
woman’s right to choose, points out: “... and in the audience is my good friend, Robert
~ ~ ~
Some of the Population Council’s 1999 Board of Trustees:
Elizabeth J. McCormack, Chairman of the Board, Associate, Rockefeller Family and
Linda G. Martin, President, Population Council, NY, NY
Jorge Balan, Program Officer, The Ford Foundation, NY, NY
Abdullahi An-Na’im, Professor of Law, Emory University, Atlanta, GA
Alaka Basu, Senior Research Associate, Cornell Univ, Ithaca, NY
Demissle Habte, Lead Health Specialist, Africa Technical Families, The World Bank,
Werner Holzer, Bad Homburg, Germany
Charles Klein, Managing Dir., American Securities, NY, NY
Robert B. Millard, Managing Dir., Lehman Brothers, Inc., NY, NY
Nancy Birdsall, Sr Assoc, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace,
Rodney B. Wagner, Vice Chairman (Retired), J.P. Morgan, NY, NY
Torsten Wiesel, President Emeritus, Rockefeller University, NY, NY
* * *
From The National Right to Life Committee website:
Mifepristone - The French Abortion Pill
RU486 is a chemical compound that, taken in pill form, can induce abortion in women
up to 9 weeks pregnant.
This compound gets the first part of its name from the French company, Roussel
Uclaf, which first developed the abortion pill back in 1980. . . . RU486 is also known by
its generic name, mifepristone, and by Mifegyne, the name under which RU486 is
marketed in Europe.
“Early Option” is the name under which it is to be sold in the United States. . . .
Bringing RU486 to the U.S.
Under the Bush administration, the FDA issued an import alert, prohibiting the import of
the drug for personal use because of safety concerns it had about the drug.
Three days after being sworn into office, President Bill Clinton signed an executive
order directing the Department of Health and Human Services and the FDA to take
steps to promote the testing, licensing, and manufacturing of the drug in the U.S.
~ ~ ~
Under the Clinton administration, the FDA took a very active role in efforts to bring the
drug into the U.S. In the course of carrying out the president’s directive, the FDA:
● Actively pressured French manufacturer Roussel Uclaf to submit a marketing
● Helped negotiate the transfer of manufacturing and marketing rights from
Roussel Uclaf to the Population Council of New York once it became clear
Roussel Uclaf would not submit an application of its own.
● Allowed the Population Council to use data from foreign studies in its marketing
application, rather than require the Council to wait until it was ready to submit
data from American studies.
● Allowed the Population Council to submit its marketing application despite not
having a finalized deal with any manufacturer or any finished chemical product
from its would-be manufacturer. The FDA allowed the Population Council to use
chemical and manufacturing data from Roussel Uclaf as the basis of the
Council’s application, knowing that Roussel Uclaf would not be the manufacturer.
● Submitted the application to an advisory panel stacked with known abortion
activists and RU486 supporters.
● Processed the application for RU486 in just six months, while potentially life
saving drugs were taking as long as 17 months to be processed.
Is that the way the drug approval process is supposed to work?
Hardly. The FDA is supposed to be an objective agency representing the health and
safety interests of the American people, not an agent for some manufacturer or some
group with an ideological or political agenda.
With all that help from the Clinton administration, what kept the drug from being
approved right away?
Perhaps even the FDA could only bend the rules so far. Having questions about the
training program and lacking any drug sample or file from the firm that was to be the
manufacturer, the best the FDA could do by the time its deadline came to rule on the
drug application was to issue an “approvable” letter ... but saying final approval would
await the resolution of certain unnamed “labeling” and “manufacturing” issues.
Soon after the FDA issued its “approvable” letter in Sept of 1996, the Population
Council and Joseph Pike, the man chosen by the Council to set up U.S. production of
RU486 and handle financing of the project, became embroiled in controversy when
would-be investors discovered in October 1996 that Mr. Pike was a disbarred
lawyer with a criminal record.
These investors were also concerned about the unusual corporate structure Pike
established and the integrity of his financial dealings and operations.
A series of suits and countersuits between the Population Council, Mr. Pike, and the
would-be investors ensured, tying the drug’s sponsor up in court for several months...
Just as those suits began to be resolved in the spring of 1997, removing Pike from day
to day management of the project, the Population Council received word that the
Hungarian manufacturer, Gedeon Richter, that they had lined up to produce the drug
for the U.S., was pulling out of the deal. Gedeon Richter gave no public reason for its
withdrawal, but their pull out forced the Population Council to have to begin their search
for a manufacturer all over again, setting back the project several years....
Why has the Population Council had such difficulty finding or keeping a
Early on, a spokesman for the Population Council indicated that several of the major
drug companies they had originally talked to didn’t want to face the internal dissension
that producing such a pill would bring. This is not surprising. Who, having devoted
their life to the production of life-saving medicines, wants suddenly to be associated
with a drug that kills little children? . . .
THE COMPANIES INVOLVED
The blanket of secrecy with which the Population Council has tried to cover all of its
activities, as well as all the mergers and acquisitions going on in the world
pharmaceutical market, make it difficult to determine precisely who is doing what....
Roussel Uclaf is the French pharmaceutical company which first developed RU486 in
the early 1980s. They were owned, first partly, then later, wholly, by German chemical
giant Hoechst AG. Together, Roussel and Hoechst owned several American
subsidiaries — Hoechst Roussel Parmaceuticals, Copley Pharmaceutical, and
Hoechst Roussel Agri-Vet.
Under pressure from the U.S. government, Hoechst and Roussel donated the
American patent for RU486 to the Population Council of New York in 1994.
Roussel retained all remaining rights (those outside the US) to RU486 and continued to
manufacture the drug for European use until at least 1997.
In 1995, Hoechst purchased American drug manufacturer Marion Merrell Dow (MMD),
forming a new pharmaceutical company Hoechst Marion Roussel (HMR), then
supposed to be the world’s third largest pharmaceutical maker.
As part of the acquisition, HMR acquired several of Marion Merret Dow’s best selling
drugs such as Cardizem and Seldane, as well as rights to a new non-sedating
antihistamine being developed by MMD called Allegra.
HMR also got MMD’s manufacturer of generic drugs, The Rugby Group.
HMR sold off The Rugby Group in 1998 and Copley Pharmaceuticals in 1999.
In 1999, Hoechst and HMR merged with another European pharmaceutical giant,
Rhone Poulenc, to form Aventis.
What about the American group who received the patent? What corporate
entities has it set up to manufacture and distribute the abortion drug?
After receiving the U.S rights to RU486 ... in 1994, the Population Council, working
with a lawyer ... by the name of Joseph Pike, set up a series of companies to handle
various aspects of the production, distribution, and marketing of RU486.
Pike and the Council first established a non-profit called Advances in Health
Technology to promote the drug and provide public education and handle doctor
training. Advances also received the license to manufacture and distribute mifepristone
which it turned around and granted as sub-licenses to two other for-profit companies
set up by Pike, Danco Laboratories and Neogen Pharmaceuticals, Inc....
Pike controlled both of the sub-licensees through a company called N.D. Management.
N.D. Management, in turn, was the sole general partner of Neogen Investors and a
limited partner, along with Neogen Investors, in a group named Neogen Holdings, LP.
Neogen Holdings was the sole shareholder of Danco, while Neogen Investors was the
sole shareholder of Neogen Pharmaceuticals. Outside investors thus gained some
stake in both the abortifacient and non-abortifacient uses of mifepristone through their
participation in Neogen Investors....
Reports appearing in 1999 and 2000 have referred to the Danco Group, rather than
Advances/Neogen, as “the company licensed to market RU-486" or the “company
sponsoring mifepristone in the United States. ...
While articles have identified the Danco Group as “a start-up pharmaceutical company”
in New York (the original Danco Laboratories was set up in California and
incorporated in the Cayman Islands, these reports and others suggest that other
unnamed firms are the actual manufacturers....
~ ~ ~
From Conspirators’ Hierarchy, by Dr. John Coleman:
The Round Table’s driving philosophy was to have Round Tablers in positions to
formulate and carry out social policies through social institutions whereby what Ruskin
called “the masses” could be manipulated....
What then are we looking at? . . . In the Committee of 300, which has a 150-year
history, we have some of the most brilliant intellects assembled to form a completely
totalitarian, absolutely controlled “new” society — only it isn’t new, having drawn most of
its ideas from the Clubs of Cultus Diabolicus.
It strives toward a One World Government rather well described by one of its late
members, H.G. Wells, in his work commissioned by the Committee which Wells boldly
called: “THE OPEN CONSPIRACY— PLANS FOR A WORLD REVOLUTION.”
It was a bold statement of intent, but not really so bold since nobody believed Wells
except the Great Superior Ones, the Anenherbes and those who were what we would
call “insiders” today. Here is an extract of what Wells proposed:
“The Open Conspiracy will appear first, I believe, as a conscious organization of
intelligent, and in some cases, wealthy men, as a movement having distinct social and
“A One-World Government and one-unit monetary system under permanent non-elected hereditary oligarchists who self-select from their numbers in the form of a feudal
system as it was in the Middle Ages.
“In this One World entity, population will be limited by restrictions on the number of
children per family, diseases, wars, famines, until 1 billion people who are useful to the
ruling class, in areas which will be strictly and clearly defined, remain as the total world
“There shall be no middle class, only rulers and servants....
“Marriage shall be outlawed and there shall be no family life as we know it. Children
shall be removed from their parents at an early-age and brought up by wards as state
property.... Women will be degraded through the continued process of ‘women’s
liberation’ movements. Free sex shall be mandatory.
“Failure to comply at least once by the age of 20 shall be punishable by severe reprisals
against her person. Self-abortion shall be taught and practiced after two children are
born to a woman; such records shall be contained in the personal file of each woman in
the One World Government’s regional computers.
“If a woman falls pregnant after she has previously given birth to two children, she shall
be forcibly removed to an abortion clinic for such an abortion and sterilization to
be carried out....”
So much for the “Woman’s Right to Choose.”
BABY PARTS FOR SALE -
A BATCH OF EYES BY UPS -
30 LIVERS BY FEDEX
by J.C. Willke, MD
After fighting abortion for 30 years I thought I had seen and heard it all, but not so.
Here is a new development, a coordinated high-tech industry functioning for the specific
purpose of obtaining and selling high-quality fetal organs for research.
Partial-Birth Abortions seemed to be so horrible that most of us wondered how such
procedures could be defended. Many of us chalked it up to the fact that the pro-abortion advocates and the abortion industry didn’t want to give one inch for fear that
their whole house of cards will fold. I, among others, felt that their resistance to
forbidding this gruesome procedure was a fear of a domino effect....
But now we have evidence of a very clear additional reason why they want these late-term abortions to continue.
The reason is that this is the one method that gives them intact fetal bodies from
which they can obtain organs for research.
The other method of late-term abortion, D&D (Dilatation and Evacuation), involves
reaching up into the uterus and dismembering the live baby. This delivers pieces of
macerated organs that are usually unsuitable for fetal research, transplantation, etc.
This may be the main reason for their vehement defense of the practice of Partial-Birth
The story was broken recently by Life Dynamics under the guidance of its director Mark
Crutcher. A lady came to him with a story, which he has verified. The name of the
informant cannot be revealed, as she is still involved in the work that she has
She worked for “an outside source, hired with a team to go in [to late term abortion
clinics] to dissect and procure fetal tissue for high-quality sales.”
Read on as Kelly (not her real name) describes her macabre profession....
“What we did was to have a contract with an abortion clinic that would allow us to go
there on certain days. We would get a generated list each day to tell us what tissue
researchers, pharmaceutical companies and universities were looking for. Then we
would examine the patient charts....”
“We were looking for eyes, livers, brains, thymuses [lymphoid tissue], cardiac blood,
cord blood, blood from the liver, even blood from the limbs....”
Kelly stated, “We would sell the tissue to private contractors. They in turn would sell to
other universities and researchers. There was a high demand every week to buy such
fetal tissues. It was shipped by UPS, FedEx, Airborne and sometimes by special
And then the obvious question. Kelly is still working for this company, so why did she
come and tell this story to a pro-life group?
One day she when she was working, “A set of twins at 24 weeks gestation was brought
to us in a pan. They were both alive. The doctor came back and said, ‘Got you some
good specimens, twins.’
I looked at him and said, ‘There’s something wrong here. They are moving. I don’t do
this. This is not in my contract.’...”
“I told him I would not be part of taking their lives. So he took a bottle of sterile water
and poured it in the pan until the fluid came up over their mouths and noses, letting
them drown. I left the room because I could not watch this.”
But she did go back to dissect them after they were dead. She said, “That’s when I
decided it was wrong. I did not want to be there when that happened.”
And then it happened again and again ... ”At 16 weeks, all the way up to sometimes
even 30 weeks, and we had live births come back to us.”
“Then the doctor would either break the neck or take a pair of tongs and beat the
fetus until it was dead....”
She was asked if the type of abortion procedure was intentionally altered to deliver to
you an intact specimen, even if that meant giving you a live baby?
Her answer was, “Yes, that was so we could sell better tissue, so that our
company would make more money. At the end of the year, they would give the
clinic back more money because we got good specimens....”
From the Life Issues Institute, Inc., July 1999,
(Compliments of Connector and Warroom)
Women We Helped Elect
EMILY's List wins elections. Since our founding, we have helped elect 79 pro-choice Democratic
women members of Congress, 15 senators, 9 governors, and hundreds of women to state and
EMILY's List has also become one of the largest financial resource for minority women seeking
federal office. Click here to learn more about our work with women in color seeking office.
* currently serving in the Senate
** no longer in office
United States House of Representatives (79)
Blanche Lambert Lincoln*
Debbie Wasserman Schultz
Carolyn Cheeks Kilpatrick
Stephanie Tubbs Jones***
Stephanie Herseth Sandlin
Eddie Bernice Johnson
Sheila Jackson Lee
Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton
United States Senate (15)
Blanche Lambert Lincoln
Carol Moseley Braun**
Ruth Ann Minner**
State and Local Office
The following are the candidates we've helped elect to state and local office since we began the
Political Opportunity Program (POP) in 2001.
Olivia Cajero Bedford
Nancy Young Wright
Gloria Negrete McLeod
Dickey Lee Hullinghorst
Helene M. Keeley
Michelle Rehwinkle Vasilinda
Stephanie Stuckey Benfield
Alisha Thomas Morgan
Mary Margaret Oliver
Maria Antonia Berrios
Barbara Flynn Currie
Iris Y. Martinez
Mary Ann Sullivan
Mary Jo Wilhelm
Ellen Cogen Lipton
Alma Wheeler Smith
Gail Kulick Jackson
Vicki Lorenz Englund
Jeanette Mott Oxford
Rochelle Walton Gray
Catherine Cortez Masto
Maggie Wood Hassan
Joni Marie Gutierrez
Melissa Mark Viverito
Alice Graham Underhill
Laurie Monnes Anderson
Suzanne Van Orman
Maria Quinones Sanchez
# # #
To find more vampires on Emily’s List...
THE WORLD’S GREATEST GREED!
BIRDS IN THE LOBBY
HOW TO PLUCK A NON-PROFIT
AIG: AMERICAN IDOL OF GREED
ALLIED WORLD ASSURANCE
THE AMERICAN RED DOUBLE-CROSS
THE EAGLE HOODED: THE 9-11 COVERUPS
THE KISSINGER OF DEATH
UNCLE SAM’S GUINEA PIGS
THE NUCLEAR NESTS
OF VAMPIRES AND DAISIES
PARROTS IN THE NEWS ROOM
PIMPS TO POWER
SONGS OF THE DRUG VULTURES
AN OCTOPUS NAMED WACKENHUT
VULTURES IN THE NATURE CONSERVANCY
X. L.- INSURANCE FROM HELL!
INDEX TO THE CATBIRD SEAT
MORE OF THE CATBIRD’S FAVORITE LINKS
THE CATBIRD SEAT FORUM
THE CATBIRD SEAT
FAIR USE NOTICE. This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always
been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in
our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic,
democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of
any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In
accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit
to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research
and educational purposes.
For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml . If you wish to use
copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must
obtain permission from the copyright owner.
THE CATBIRD SEAT ARCHIVES
The Catbird Seat Archives: 2000-2002
The Catbird Seat Archives: 2002-2007
~ ~ ~
CONTACT THE CATBIRD AT
* * * * *